[pp312]

Quote:

who knows what I will like in 20-30-40 years  

 Well, your exquisite beauty will have faded, that's for sure, and you'll probably be deaf as a post from listening to too many headphones too loudly, so even a Grado SR60 will sound great to you. That will ease the pain of choice quite a lot.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Quote:

who knows what I will like in 20-30-40 years  

 Well, your exquisite beauty will have faded, that's for sure, and you'll probably be deaf as a post from listening to too many headphones too loudly, so even a Grado SR60 will sound great to you. That will ease the pain of choice quite a lot.

I guess that makes the future bright if I am going to be using Grados

 

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

who knows what I will like in 20-30-40 years  

 Well, your exquisite beauty will have faded, that's for sure, and you'll probably be deaf as a post from listening to too many headphones too loudly, so even a Grado SR60 will sound great to you. That will ease the pain of choice quite a lot.

I guess that makes the future bright if I am going to be using Grados

Hey, maybe you'll still be able to hear well when you're an old fart like me!
 

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

who knows what I will like in 20-30-40 years  

 Well, your exquisite beauty will have faded, that's for sure, and you'll probably be deaf as a post from listening to too many headphones too loudly, so even a Grado SR60 will sound great to you. That will ease the pain of choice quite a lot.

I guess that makes the future bright if I am going to be using Grados

Hey, maybe you'll still be able to hear well when you're an old fart like me!
 

I can only hope for such luck!  Then again, if the HD 800 sound like the LCD-2 in 20 years, and keep the same soundstage it is going to be epic win.
 

 

[rhythmdevils]

I hate to think what Grados are going to sound like as John Grado gets older....

 

[feifan]

Quote:

I like both headphones quite a bit and I agree with Larry's post completely. Just another piece of the puzzle here at Head-fi: sorting through the information, and filtering out the BS. I don't get frustrated by it because I find that it's all part of the learning process, even if what I am learning is information culling and human rhetorical psychology. It can get tiresome, but it's also a window into how a completely diverse group of people that happen to have an affinity for headphones in common can sort through and interpret this kind of information. But yes, synergy is evreything; it's virtually impossible to evaluate any piece of gear (especially headphones) thoroughly in the isolation of a single setup. [bold added]
Even though it could be more efficient I enjoy the process and don't spend much time on other forums

Re the parts in bold -- well said, Grokit. You've put into words something I've known but didn't know I knew. Things click into place as we listen to the voices in Head-Fi forums. Much of it is noise, but every once in a while there's a gem -- like your comment above -- and, as you say, we find another valuable piece of the puzzle. I'm finding that certain voices click more often than others, and I tend to trust them more. For me, their words have a ring of truth. They're not about bashing anyone or pretending to know more than they actually do. They don't talk for the sake of talking. When they post, they have something worth saying, worth hearing, worth thinking about. Their words are like lit matches in a dark space. However small the flame, they momentarily light up the dark for the rest of us. Thanks for the reminder that the enjoyment of this hobby is in the journey, in the learning, and that good company makes the journey all the more pleasant.
 

 

[skeptic]

Quote:

I don't think the HD 800 are more revealing because they actually are. I think they are more "revealing" because their peaks are revealed horribly by some recordings, and not by others... so there certainly is a greater shift based on what they are fed, but it is a result of a technical shortcoming and not a technical advantage.
 

 
I've noticed a lot of interesting posts akin to the above suggesting, in essence, that the HD800's have a design defect in the form of a 6khz peak on their response curve.  In theory, it makes sense to me that a treble peak might result in listening fatigue, but I don't understand how that plays out in the case of the HD800's given where the peak is on the curve.
 
In my perhaps flawed understanding, 6khz is basically irrelevant to anything but overtones (I will return to this topic) if you are listening to recordings of vocals and natural instruments.  (See: http://www.listenhear.co.uk/general_acoustics.htm  )  For example, violins appear to cut off, on the high end around 3.5khz - and even piccolos only extend to around 5khz.  A serious spike sub 4khz (hello there DT880s) seems like it might be a real factor with respect to fatigue and treble balance, but peaks at 5khz and beyond don't seem like they should matter so much unless you are listening to a lot of recordings featuring the highest pitched pipes on a pipe organ.
 
The impact on overtones, however, might present a real issue.  My basic understanding from Morgan Jones' treatise on Valve Amps (http://www.amazon.com/Valve-Amplifiers-Third-Morgan-Jones/dp/0750656948 ) - which I am slowly working my way through - is that overtones are the basis for the difference in tone/timbre between one instrument/voice and another.  In this light, a substantial spike on the frequency curve, might well effect the voicing of any number of instruments (or perhaps all of them?).  Then again, wouldn't the same statement apply to the treble roll-off on the LCD-2 - and its impact on overtones? 

 

[grokit]

The LCD-2's treble is a bit recessed, but not rolled off as it extends quite nicely.

 

[kwkarth]

Even though there are no fundamentals above about 4.2kHz, the overtones do indeed play a very large part in acoustic differentiation between instruments.  WRT the HD-800, the instant I put them on, I can hear the emphasis around 6kHz.  For some reason it sticks out like a sore thumb to my ears.  I have not heard them on an amp which minimizes this peak in their response.
 

 
 
While the chart begins to provide a grasp of where instruments lie across the frequency range, it has some critical omissions. The pipe organ, for instance,which goes down into subterranean regions, isn't represented. Neither is the bass drum, which has lots of energy below 50 Hz. Most critically, however, the chart portrays only the fundamental tones that instruments generate. What it doesn't show is the overtones, the harmonic frequencies, that give instruments their characteristic sound — their timbre. 

Harmonics are what let you tell instruments apart. Without them, similar instruments that played the same frequencies would sound the same. The harmonics are produced not by the notes, but by the method by which the musician sets those notes into motion and the materials used to produce the notes. The plucking of a string on a guitar, or the bowing of the string on a violin, is a lot different from the metallic resonance of a flute as air is blown through it by pursed lips, or the sound of a drum's membrane when it's struck by a hand or a drumstick. Everything counts — the "attack" frequencies at the onset of notes (which are tremendously different from instrument to instrument), the "decay" frequencies at the end of those notes, the various resonances set in motion by the materials used for instruments, the differences between media excited from outside (like the string or the drum) and those excited from inside, like the flute and the trumpet. And besides upper harmonics, there are also subharmonics. The world of music is incredibly rich and varied. 

We could go further, but what our chart does is give you a beginning taste of what "Hz" (cycles per second) really mean musically. There are charts that show the harmonics of instruments as well as the fundamentals, but we've never seen one that shows the varying harmonic intensities of all instruments in comparison with each other. (If you have, please let us know!) As we said earlier, the point is music. While we at PSB are intent on doing justice to the sound of crashing buses and dinosaur footfalls as well as flutes and violins and snare drums, it's the sound of music that keeps our juices flowing.  (from PSB Audio)

 

[Roger Strummer]

^ Here you can see one of my favorite charts, it is very complete and also interactive, pretty cool and informative.
 
Also here is a chart that seems to take harmonic intensity into account, although it doesn't have many instruments
 

 
It is also notable that the 6 khz is included in the range relevant to sibilance.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

^ Here you can see one of my favorite charts, it is very complete and also interactive, pretty cool and informative.
 
Also here is a chart that seems to take harmonic intensity into account, although it doesn't have many instruments
 

 
It is also notable that the 6 khz is included in the range relevant to sibilance.

Very cool Roger!  Thanks, this is the single most comprehensive chart I've seen.  This should be helpful to many people!
 

 

[skeptic]

Quote:

The LCD-2's treble is a bit recessed, but not rolled off as it extends quite nicely.

 
At least in so far as I can tell, and per the graph below, it looks to me like the LCD-2's are "rolled off" in the sense of exhibiting "gradually reduced response at the upper end of the working frequency range."  ( http://www.thefreedictionary.com/roll+off )
 
FR graph taken from: http://www.ethereality.info/ethereality_website/about_me/wordpress/?p=994
 

 
Quote:

 WRT the HD-800, the instant I put them on, I can hear the emphasis around 6kHz.  For some reason it sticks out like a sore thumb to my ears.  I have not heard them on an amp which minimizes this peak in their response.

 
Would you elaborate on this?  Assuming we agree on the fact you are not hearing additional treble emphasis within the array of "fundamental tones" in the recordings you are listening to (certain pipe organ tracks excluded), what is it that sticks out like a sore thumb?  Do you mean that the timbre of certain instruments sticks out as sounding wrong in some way?  Note: I'm asking this purely for my own edification and not out of any attachment to either set of these headphones.  The more specificity you can offer in your description, the better from my point of view.  Are certain genre's/instruments the greatest offenders?  Certain labels?  Studio vs live?
 
On the other side of the coin, why is it that the serious dip in the LCD-2's curve, at 6-8khz (depending on whether you're looking at the higher or lower amplitude curve), doesn't cause just as much, if not more, degradation in tone - if the overtones in that range are being seriously short-changed by as much as 15db?
 
Edit: thanks for sharing that chart Roger!  How much consensus is there in the audio world about the frequency range of the various descriptors written across the bottom area?

 

[sokolov91]

I think the HD 800 have a particular sound you hear with anything... not necessarily a bad thing but an HD 800 sound nonetheless.
 
Can't say I would immediately say "6khz" spike either if I had not looked at the graph first, but most certainly something sightly off or boosted in the treble for sure.
 
I don't listen to much classical and I could be wrong but modern music definitely seems to have more of an issue with the HD 800 than any other... hi hats that are really forward, cymbals that crash through songs (enjoyable most of the time I must admit) and if you do sweeps you do notice a significant boost once you get past the mids for the most part.
 
I think the LCD-2 criticism is just as fair as the HD 800 criticism although I do not hear the roll off as offensive, but I do hear the spike as so. Go figure. If anything the LCD-2 make most music sound better to me because the songs do not become dominated by hi hats, cymbals, or other treble related stuff as with other headphones.. brighter music sounds realistic (to me) and never fatiguing.. don't hear it as rolled off in a coloured sense either... the LCD-2 seems to have ample clarity in the treble..
 
The HD 800 sound a little over-dampened, "hi-fi" and coloured in comparision... but highly enjoyable and supremely comfortable.
 
If they did and HD 800 or LCD-2 with HD 800 comfort and soundstaging, with LCD-2 imaging and bass, and compromise in the hi frequency response I would dump all other audio related gear I had. To my ears that would be perfect.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

At least in so far as I can tell, and per the graph below, it looks to me like the LCD-2's are "rolled off" in the sense of exhibiting "gradually reduced response at the upper end of the working frequency range."  ( http://www.thefreedictionary.com/roll+off )
 
FR graph taken from: http://www.ethereality.info/ethereality_website/about_me/wordpress/?p=994
 
Would you elaborate on this?  Assuming we agree on the fact you are not hearing additional treble emphasis within the array of "fundamental tones" in the recordings you are listening to (certain pipe organ tracks excluded), what is it that sticks out like a sore thumb?  Do you mean that the timbre of certain instruments sticks out as sounding wrong in some way?  Note: I'm asking this purely for my own edification and not out of any attachment to either set of these headphones.  The more specificity you can offer in your description, the better from my point of view.  Are certain genre's/instruments the greatest offenders?  Certain labels?  Studio vs live?
 
On the other side of the coin, why is it that the serious dip in the LCD-2's curve, at 6-8khz (depending on whether you're looking at the higher or lower amplitude curve), doesn't cause just as much, if not more, degradation in tone - if the overtones in that range are being seriously short-changed by as much as 15db?
 
Edit: thanks for sharing that chart Roger!  How much consensus is there in the audio world about the frequency range of the various descriptors written across the bottom area?

Good question!
 
.pdf]http://www.uwec.edu/walkerjs/media/38228[1].pdf
 
See document I referenced about if you're interested.
 
There is a great deal of very audible information that is above all the fundamental frequencies that allows us to identify and differentiate instruments from one another.  The frequency emphasis around 6kHz is simply very audible and unnatural.  Because it is not natural, it sticks out as such, the instant I put the headphones on.  I heard it the instant I put the headphones on for the very first time.  It seems to be a "voice" characteristic of the HD-800s just as the 10Hz peak is for the Beyerdynamic T1s.  I suspect the subdued HF FR of the LCD-2s does not jump out because is follows more or less, the HRTF of the average person, which is also why the headphone tends to sound "natural" to many listeners.  Keep in mind, I do not view the FR aberrations I've mentioned as criticisms of these various headphones, but rather simply honest observations.

 

[kwkarth]

BTW, there is one fairly significant error in the paper I referenced in my previous post, and I thought I should point it out.
 
Walker states; "Unlike tuning forks, sounds from musical instruments are time-evolving superpositions of several pure tones, or sinusoidal waves."
 
One could argue that any waveform could be produced by the superposition of enough disparate sine waves, but fundamentally;
 
The fact is, that the shape of the waveform produced by various instruments is not solely comprised of sine waves.  Conical bore woodwinds such as the oboe produce triangle waves rather than sine waves for example.  There may be other omissions and errors that I haven't caught, but that was significant enough to bring to your attention.